Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

"Don't Look Up" — Climate change: Is there a prevailing view among Objectivists about what, if anything, should be done right now about anthropogenic climate change?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

I recently watched the comedy-drama movie "Don't Look Up" on Netflix, starring Jennifer Lawrence and Leonardo Di Caprio.

The writer and director of the film, Adam McKay, has said that it is meant to be convert more people to call for action to slow, stop, and reverse anthropogenic climate change. 

Edited by dream_weaver
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • dream_weaver changed the title to "Don't Look Up" — Climate change: Is there a prevailing view among Objectivists about what, if anything, should be done right now about anthropogenic climate change?

While art does impact those who experience it, Leonard Peikoff explained how a picture (or a picture show) is not an argument. (ARI Campus: Ford Hall Forum presentation, and some further commentary by James Valliant.)

Global Warming has been discussed in many threads on this forum here. Please feel free to explore some of these before launching another thread.

As of January 23, 2022, there are:

(53 pages of "Global Warming" mentions.)

(2 pages of " Global Warming" in title only.)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is the role of government? The role of government is to protect its citizens from the use of physical force or fraud. It has no moral right to protect individuals from the effects of climate change by lowering our standard of living even if we conceed that it is an actual phenomenon in reality.

Observe the hierarchy of values of those who favor heavy government intervention into the economy for the supposed purpose of combatting climate change. They care about nature, as such. The idea of reorganizing nature to suit man's purposes is a vicious one to them. They care about animals, insects, etc. Their view of man is a malevolent one. They say our greed is disturbing mother nature's balance, the eco-system, etc. 

Man, in order to survive, must be left free to think and act on his own judgment. This is why the government may not interfere. Incidentally, it is those free minds that will come up with better, more sustainable ways of producing energy. The only example I can think of which would constitute legitimate grounds for the government to step in would be if someone is dumping toxic waste onto your property. In a free and voluntary society, property would be privately owned, so the example of dumping toxic waste would be a violation of someone's property rights. 

Edited by RationalEgoist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...